From: Joe Korty <joe.korty@ccur.com>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjanv@redhat.com>
Cc: Ethan Weinstein <lists@stinkfoot.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
Subject: Re: 2.6.1 and irq balancing
Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 11:50:12 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040111165012.GA24746@tsunami.ccur.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1073814681.4431.5.camel@laptop.fenrus.com>
On Sun, Jan 11, 2004 at 10:51:22AM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Sun, 2004-01-11 at 00:14, Ethan Weinstein wrote:
> > Greetings all,
> >
> > I upgraded my server to 2.6.1, and I'm finding I'm saddled with only
> > interrupting on CPU0 again. 2.6.0 does this as well. This is the
> > Supermicro X5DPL-iGM-O (E7501 chipset), 2 Xeons@2.4ghz HT enabled.
> > /proc/cpuinfo is normal as per HT, displaying 4 cpus.
>
> you should run the userspace irq balance daemon:
> http://people.redhat.com/arjanv/irqbalance/
I have long wondered what is so evil about most interrupts going to
CPU 0 that we felt we had to have a pair of irqdaemons in 2.6. From my
(admittedly imperfect) experience, the APIC will route an interrupt to
CPU 1 if CPU 0 is busy with another interrupt, to CPU 2 if 0 and 1 are
so occupied, and so on. I see no harm in this other than the strangely
lopsided /proc/interrupt displays, which I can live with.
Earlier APICs had a variation where the search for where each new
interrupt was to go started with first cpu after the one that got the
last interrupt. If we call this 'round-robin' allocation, then today's
technique could be described as 'first fit'.
If I am wrong about this, I would dearly love to be corrected :)
Joe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-01-11 16:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-01-10 23:14 2.6.1 and irq balancing Ethan Weinstein
2004-01-11 2:39 ` Ed Tomlinson
2004-01-11 3:38 ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-11 9:52 ` Arjan van de Ven
2004-01-11 5:19 ` Ethan Weinstein
2004-01-11 9:51 ` Arjan van de Ven
2004-01-11 16:50 ` Joe Korty [this message]
2004-01-11 18:19 ` Arjan van de Ven
2004-01-15 11:43 ` Pavel Machek
2004-01-11 13:14 ` Martin Schlemmer
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-01-11 23:59 Nakajima, Jun
2004-01-12 4:42 ` Bill Davidsen
2004-01-12 14:06 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2004-01-12 16:10 ` Martin J. Bligh
2004-01-13 6:50 ` Ethan Weinstein
2004-01-13 7:05 ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-13 7:57 Nakajima, Jun
2004-01-13 8:09 Nakajima, Jun
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040111165012.GA24746@tsunami.ccur.com \
--to=joe.korty@ccur.com \
--cc=arjanv@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lists@stinkfoot.org \
--cc=wli@holomorphy.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.